You can use whois to see when the domain was registered. Since all the other extensions weren't registered I'd assume this is more of a brand style name and was registered fairly recently. It is hard to assign value of a domain without knowing what it is. Also, most people who sell domains are looking for the sales to compensate for the rest of their portfolio that don't sell. So registration fees + 10% wouldn't likely work as an offer.
I guess it is also worth slightly less than 800 AOL patents. I think it is just how much someone will pay for it vs "worth". How can you really arrive at an estimate that NY Times ~ Instagram ~ 800 Patents anyway?
Think it's the filters. Some are purely an algorithm, but I assume other filters work by merging the photo with a template image. Maybe this has to be stored in high res in the app.
While I mostly agree with this, I think over time you can see some reasons for re-write. Two of the errors used as examples as bug fixes may no longer be relevant with current hardware progress. "Another one fixes that bug that occurs in low memory conditions. Another one fixes that bug that occurred when the file is on a floppy disk and the user yanks out the disk in the middle."
Were the low memory issues due to the limitations of current hardware at the time and no longer relevant? Do many computers still have floppy disks, and would you still want to have to support that?
I think re-writes should be avoided unless you have a full understanding of the reasons for all the one-off patches. You should also have an idea of what you will lose/gain by getting rid of them.
Whether it is due to marketers putting the codes everywhere or actual value is yet to be said, but certainly don't think the technology itself is failing.
I've gotten a few of these. When I did some research on the company it sounded like some of these links could be about gambling and herbal pills. That could have some implications for search engine ranking because you are now promoting a questionable site. Also, wasn't too keen about the annual agreement; term seemed too long. Ultimately, I decided not to do it.
Probably coincidental, but the math lines up where Google could retroactively buy into the group at the price of it's 900M bid. After that the 4.5 Billion would be split evenly between the five companies.
Edit: Looks the BetaBeat article excluded EMC and Ericsson, so the split wouldn't work so nicely.
Well, I think it depends on what you define as a success. To become celebrity filmmaker, probably so. But to "start over" and just find a better job like the guy in the tweet is asking should be reasonable to accomplish.
The thing is it is actually worse than that. It is 100% conversion with the assumption that every single visitor would instead use accusing site instead of going to any of the other alternatives.
I understand your goal is to get the best deal for your client but I think the way you test potential vendors may be a little removed to give you adequate information. Consider this company has a lot more information on the recommended path to properly learning their product. Through experience with other customers they may know ahead of time that the basic version is all that is really needed for a non-commercial user.
Just one suggestion for your timeline. I would suggest "decided on domain name" and "bought a domain" appear one after the other. I just don't trust sitting on domain ideas if they are available for hand registration.
I also don't think they would want to encourage their patrons to take their phones out during meals. Think this is still considered poor form, could be wrong though.
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/07/new-programming-jar...